[ad_1]
A letter to KED for the refereeing of the match with PAS Giannina and more specifically for the phase of Ahmed Hassan’s goal disallowed in the delays, was sent by PAE Olympiakos.
ADVERTISING
The ‘rojiblancos’ assure that the goal was illegally and illegally annulled, while emphasizing that ““They are trying to fraudulently harm our team by the operation of the VAR and distort the result against us.”
At the same time, they ask the KED to publish at the same critical moment the full conversations of the match referees with the VAR referees as well as the image of the VAR Chamber.
The letter to KED:
Restore the truth in relation to the unprecedented happened during the match between our team and PAE PAS GIANNINA last Sunday, 04.10.2020 and especially regarding the team’s goal that was illegally annulled and therefore the result was directly altered. of this match, depriving our team of 2 points, we make you solely responsible for what we describe in detail below.
In particular, he is trying to create in the fans the feeling that the offside line is supposedly an advanced system of automatic indication of players who are in an offside position, fraudulently concealing that all of the above are no more what decisions and actions of the referees. of VAR (VAR, AVAR). In particular, there are 4 points in which these VAR referees intervene directly and can alter without inconvenience, fraudulently as in this case, the evaluation of a phase as offside or not.
The first refers to what and how many shots the VAR operators will give to the match VAR referees to decide on the disputed phase, which is the responsibility of the Company that technically supports the VAR system.
The second refers to which specific plan (of all those available) the referee will decide to use the VAR for the evaluation of the phase, which is the only one that will be made known to the referee, the KED or publicly to support this decision.
The third concerns, especially in the case of offside, since the VAR referee decides when the player makes contact with the ball and when the attacker must be exposed according to the rules, so to be out of the game. As is easily understood, even fractions of a second at that point or the frame of an image drastically change the evaluation and final judgment. This decision and the selection of the time to be judged offside is made manually by the VAR referees and not automatically and is the exclusive decision of the VAR referees, since it depends entirely on the judgment and intentions of the VAR referees, who if they are fraudulent: as in our case, they can directly alter the result.
And finally, the fourth refers to exactly how the last defender’s point is chosen but also the attacker’s point to mark (“mark”) the offside line. All these points are selected manually and exclusively by decision of the VAR referees. Then, any fraudulent – as in this case – or deliberate selection of different or dissimilar points (arm in arm!) By the referees of the VAR of the match alters the alignment of the line and therefore its final evaluation.
Therefore, especially on the offside issue, the final decision is clear that it is a direct result of all the previous choices and decisions of the VAR referees. So not only can it be wrong depending on the decisions made by the VAR referees, it can even deliberately cause a wrong decision or even select the “correct” images to make an incorrect decision appear correct later.
The example of our team’s supposedly offside goal in the match against PAS GIANNINA is the most typical. Which Mr. Klattenberg fraudulently covered in his public telecritics (!!!) and so of course even today the KED has not made public the conversations between the stadium referees and the VAR referees or the image of the VAR Chamber so with transparency (which Mr. Clattenberg constantly invokes) so that fans know what was said and done at the crucial moment. How he fraudulently covered the referee’s deliberate decision not to charge a penalty in favor of Semedo, while from the correct kick back the violation is clearly visible. How he fraudulently disguised in violation of the rules the deliberate decisions of the match referee Panaitolikos – AEK for not imposing a penalty and for late re-entry of a soccer player onto the field.
It is clear that once again an attempt is being made to fraudulently harm our team by handling the VAR and distort the result against us.
Although it is clear from the analysis with all the available technical tools of the disputed phase of the offside call, that our team’s goal was illegally and illegally annulled.
Likewise, the previous fraudulent actions of both the KED and the field referees and the VAR, as analyzed above, directly cause damage to our company, which we will report to the competent criminal and civil courts.
Finally, we reserve the right to exercise all our legal rights to protect our team from previous fraudulent actions that directly harm it, we invite you once again to publish all the conversations of the match referees with the VAR referees as well as the image of the VAR Room at the same critical moment.
Without prejudice to all our legal rights.
[ad_2]
